JI7
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-14-04 09:14 PM
Original message |
| does anyone have a list of states Gore competed for in 2000 ? |
|
not just states he won, but the ones he campaigned in and put resources in to try to win.
|
dolstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-14-04 10:30 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. The only states Gore competed for in 2000 and lost |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-14-04 10:31 PM by dolstein
were Florida, New Hampshire, Arkansas, Tennessee, Nevada and West Virginia. The Gore campaign wrote off Ohio pretty early -- too early many have argued (albeit with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight). I don't believe that Gore made any real effort in Arizona or Virginia.
|
Josh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 04:10 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 2. He didn't spend a dime in Arizona or Virginia and they were pretty close - |
|
I think he did campaign in Missouri, but I can't be certain.
|
Awsi Dooger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
| 4. Absolutely, Gore campaigned in Missouri |
|
Dolstein forgot that one. Otherwise, his list is correct.
The problem was not the isolated states but the emphasis. Gore took Tennessee and West Virginia for granted far too long, and dumped possibly winnable Ohio months before the election. He barely visited up-for-grabs Nevada even though Yucca Mountain was an obvious Bush vulnerability.
It can be argued too much emphasis was placed on Michigan and Pennsylvania, given our eventual margins in those states, but as dolstein indicated that's pure 20/20. I certainly didn't expect those margins.
We tend to forget Gore barely carried states like Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, New Mexico and Oregon. There would be much more DU focus on those states this year if Bush had carried them in 2000. I'm worried one or more might turn into our West Virginia surprise this time.
It can't be denied Gore made pathetic use of Clinton. I remember the Big Dog wasting away in California a week or so before November 7.
|
JI7
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 5. Gore kept Clinton away, and he only came to California because state pols |
|
asked him to.
california state politicians asked clinton to come to california even if he doesn't have gore's permission so clinton came here.
good thing kerry is making good use of clinton unlike gore. kerry mentions clinton as much as he can and is working with clinton on how he can help him while promoting his book and talks to him very often.
|
fujiyama
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 6. Iowa, Oregon, and Wisconsin |
|
Edited on Tue Jun-15-04 10:26 AM by fujiyama
do worry me. They all within 1%...
Unfortunately, Nader really made Gore divert resources from OH, into states like those above, as well as MN.
Sure enough Bush is putting a lot of money into those three, as well as PA. He's made a lot of trip there, and I believe they view at as the one state most likely to peel away from us.
Another state Gore put too much time and money into was New Jersey, which ended up going for him by 15%.
|
dolstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 8. Gore's effort in Tennessee and West Virginia |
|
I've always felt that Gore's hands were tied in Tennessee. If he started running TV ads or scheduling campaign stops, the press would have churned out article after article about how the Gore campaign was struggling so badly that Gore was in danger of losing his home state. The fact that the Gore campaign was able to effective bury this potential bombshell is pretty impressive. Sure, if he had done more earlier in the campaign, he might have deterred Bush from making a real effort in Tennessee. But given what the difficult choices the Gore campaign faced in the final days of the campaign, I think they made the reasonable decision to focus on Florida, which had more electoral votes and where Gore was running stronger in the polls.
As for West Virginia, the Gore campaign had Byrd cut a television ad for him and Byrd campaigned with Gore in the final days of the campaign. As Byrd noted, this was the first time he had campaigned for a presidential candidate since Kennedy in 1960.
If it weren't for Ralph Nader, who made states like Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, Wisconin and Iowa competitive, I'm sure that Gore would have devoted more time to Tennessee and West Virginia. That's just another thing we have to thank Ralph for.
|
dolstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
JI7
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 3. he should have let Clinton campaign in Arkansas and New Hampshire |
|
for him. arkansas because clinton is from there. and new hampshire because that's where clinton became the "come back kid" and picked up momentum to help win the election when many thought his campaign was over.
|
dolstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
| 9. Gore's campaign considered this |
|
But they found that the "Clinton effect" could not be contained to a single state or a single city. They found that when Clinton campaigned in one state, the national news media would report on it and Gore would actually lose support elsewhere.
I watched many of the post mortem panels on the 2000 campaign, and Gore's campaign staff were adamant that while Clinton was able to energize the base, Clinton hurt Gore -- badly -- among the swing voters he needed to win. Their decision not to have Clinton actively campaign for him was not made on a whim.
People around here don't realize just how toxic Clinton had become among swing voters in 2000.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Feb 18th 2026, 02:02 PM
Response to Original message |